(09-02-2009, 11:30 AM)Lavazza Wrote: It seems to me that this statement indicates a clear difference of philosophy between the confederation and the Oahspe author. I would expect a confederation entity to infact take the exact opposite stance, that we of Earth should proceed in confusion and come to find the truth of matters by our own means. Basically the principals of freewill, which as we know Confederation sources make no small issue of.
Hi Lavazza,
(First, thank you your kind note, I've replied via PM.) As to the above, I think that you may be reading too much into this statement. Consider first: What is revelation? If you subscribe to the definition that revelation is "the act or process of disclosing something previously secret or obscure, esp something true", then this can still be done within the bounds of free will. Especially if one is freely seeking the revelation even through meditation or prayer.
Now consider that the Law of One clearly has provided "knowledge of the forces and currents of the unseen worlds and their dominion over the seen world". As such, did the Law of One infringe upon your free will by sharing this knowledge? I'm sure you would say not. Why? Because you were seeking the revelation.
Now consider someone that is not seeking. Were you to share some of this knowledge with them from the Law of One (or heaven forbid Oahspe), would their free will have been infringed? Hmm, well maybe yes and maybe not. They could easily discount your shared knowledge as absurd based upon the fact that the source of this knowledge was "an ascended alien speaking through a librarian to an airline pilot". That is to say, there is sufficient room for them to choose to disbelieve. If however, they were not searching, but still saw the wisdom in your shared knowledge, and accepted it as fact, then they may indeed have been infringed. But not by Ra, or Don or Carla or Jim, or the publisher, but by you. (Note, whether or not they were actually infringed, is more a function of how they react now being enlightened. It is quite possible that you were sent by their higher self to share just this tidbit of wisdom, knowing that it would awaken them).
The way I read the passage (and I read the entire two chapters in your link), what I hear the author saying and pardon my paraphrasing is that if someone misunderstands the source of prophecies, then they should be corrected by insight. Insight being another term for revelation. The fact that the author would suggest Oahspe as an acceptable source for this insight simply returns us to the earlier discussion. Put another way, I see the author recommending that prophets search for the true source of their prophecies, through divine revelation.
After reading the two chapters that you provided the link for, I must say that I think we are spending too much mental capital on this work. It is clear to me that the Confederate source of the material is now working overtime to try to remove the distortions from the resultant work and minimize the distortions that it has caused in those seeing the Law of One. I would further point out that by examining the resultant work in such detail vis-a-vis a much less distorted work called the Law of One, and thereby questioning the entire process of Council review of material to be transmitted, thereby creating suspicion of the least distorted work available at time present, we are in reality creating this poor SMC a lot more work.
I say, let's give him a break and stop dwelling on his mistake (though I'm sure Ra wouldn't refer to it as one),
Love and Light,
3D Sunset